I managed to squeeze out 32 triangles from the current viper body without changing the shape, while simultaneously filling the holes on its underside (visible on vtols)I also re-mapped it so that faces do not share uv:s (I prefer to have it like that when baking)

Jorzi wrote:I managed to squeeze out 32 triangles from the current viper body without changing the shape, while simultaneously filling the holes on its underside (visible on vtols)

nice

I also re-mapped it so that faces do not share uv:s (I prefer to have it like that when baking)

I don't think that texture should have symmetrical parts separated and don't see a real reason to do it. It's just easy to map but doubles the work required to make the diffuse texture. And also you lose in zoom of details when save symmetrical parts.

So... IMHO it has to be re-mapped.

P.S. Let me recreate the viper model plssss. It's my first and favorite model for this project(at least for now ). though... we can make 2 models and then decide which one is better.

Anyway my reasons for wanting unique uv:s is this:We have a bigger limitation on polycount than on texture space.Sometimes you may wish to make your texture asymetrical.Blender sometimes produces bad bakes when faces share the texture, requiring you to bake the mesh in parts.No mirroring required for normal maps. (you would need to have some kind of method to determine on which faces the x/y/z channels need to be inverted)Ability to use object space normal maps speeds up performance and compensates for less efficient usage of texture space

Anyway, I guess you use a slightly different workflow which makes some of my points less relevant.Hopefully someone will sooner or later implement a decent support for normal maps which will support both of our workflows.

Anyway my reasons for wanting unique uv:s is this:We have a bigger limitation on polycount than on texture space.Sometimes you may wish to make your texture asymetrical.Blender sometimes produces bad bakes when faces share the texture, requiring you to bake the mesh in parts.

3ds max doesn't have problems with this.

No mirroring required for normal maps. (you would need to have some kind of method to determine on which faces the x/y/z channels need to be inverted)Ability to use object space normal maps speeds up performance and compensates for less efficient usage of texture space

I use tangent space normal maps. and I prefer to spend more time on mapping the UV's than on creating diffuse texture.

Anyway, I guess you use a slightly different workflow which makes some of my points less relevant.Hopefully someone will sooner or later implement a decent support for normal maps which will support both of our workflows.

I hope...

P.S. I will start to work on the viper model as soon as I'll finish all models I started to remake.